Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.development:1387 rec.arts.poems:36644 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!mycroft From: mycroft@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development,rec.arts.poems Subject: Re: Status of FDC Driver for *BSD Date: 04 Nov 1993 17:29:04 GMT Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab Lines: 25 Message-ID: <MYCROFT.93Nov4122904@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> References: <jmonroyCFvw53.H6K@netcom.com> <2ba71m$fkt@u.cc.utah.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: duality.ai.mit.edu In-reply-to: terry@cs.weber.edu's message of 4 Nov 1993 06:21:42 GMT In article <2ba71m$fkt@u.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes: Public access to these mailing lists is simple; for the most part, the division of labor between NetBSD and FreeBSD can be characterized as "kernel + ports to new platforms" vs. "386 + utilities update + package based release engineering". Only if one were to be completely off the mark. As I've pointed out several times, I am personally working on rewriting much of the i386-specific code in NetBSD. This work is fairly far advanced. It is also the case that in general NetBSD has been much quicker to incorporate new (mostly bug-fix) releases of certain packages like the DB library and sendmail. And there is someone actively working on making the entire tree nearly POSIX-compliant. And we also have shared libraries now (though currently shared C++ libraries aren't possible). Etc, etc. As you can see, the division you propose is fallacious. majordomo@sun-lamp.berkeley.edu That's `sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu'.